Environmental impact of small-bowel capsule endoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: The environmental impact of endoscopy, including small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), has gained attention due to its contribution to the global carbon footprint. This study aimed to evaluate the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (kgCO2e) of SBCE, including devices life cycle and capsule journey. METHODS: SBCE devices (3 brands) were evaluated using life cycle assessment methodology (ISO 14040), including patient travelling, bowel preparation, capsule examination and video recording. A survey was conducted on 120 patients undergoing a SBCE to gather data on their transportation, activities during the procedure, and awareness of pollution generated and on 87 physicians reading capsules. RESULTS: For the 3 different capsules, the weight was 4 g (3.9-5.2% of total), while 43 to 119 g were attributed for packaging (9-97%) including 5 g of deactivation magnets (4-6%) and 11 to 50 g for instruction forms (40%). A full SBCE generated between 19 and 20 kgCO2e, including 0.04 kgCO2e (0.2%) for the capsule itself and 18 kgCO2e related to patient travelling (94.7%). Capsule retrieval would add 0.98 kgCO2e using dedicated devices. Capsule deconstruction revealed components (e.g. Neodymium) that are prohibited from environmental disposal. 76% of patients were not aware of the illegal nature of flushing capsules, and 63% would be willing to retrieve it. Data storage and physician impact were negligible. CONCLUSION: The GHG emission of SBCE is mainly determined by patient travelling. The capsule device itself has a comparably low carbon footprint. Considering capsule components disposal is illegal, retrieval of the capsule seems crucial but increasing device-related emissions.

Systematic Resection of the Visible Scar After Incomplete Endoscopic Resection of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors.

INTRODUCTION: When initial resection of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (r-NETs) is not R0, persistence of local residue could lead to disease recurrence. This study aimed to evaluate the interest of systematic resection of non-R0 r-NET scars. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all the consecutive endoscopic revisions and resections of the scar after non-R0 resections of r-NETs. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included. Salvage endoscopic procedure using endoscopic submucosal dissection or endoscopic full-thickness resection showed an R0 rate of near 100%. Residual r-NET was found in 43% of cases. DISCUSSION: In case of non-R0 resected r-NET, systematic scar resection by endoscopic full-thickness resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection seems necessary.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection assisted by adaptive traction: results of the first 54 procedures.

BACKGROUND : Good submucosal exposure is key to successful endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and can be achieved with various traction devices. Nevertheless, these devices have a fixed traction force that tends to decrease as the dissection progresses. In contrast, the ATRACT adaptive traction device increases traction during the procedure. METHODS : In this retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data (from a French database), we analyzed ESD procedures performed with the ATRACT device between April 2022 and October 2022. The device was used consecutively whenever possible. We collected details of lesion characteristics, procedural data, histologic outcomes, and clinical consequences for the patient. RESULTS : 54 resections performed in 52 patients by two experienced operators (46 procedures) and six novices (eight procedures) were analyzed. The ATRACT devices used were the ATRACT-2 (n = 21), the ATRACT 2 + 2 (n = 30), and the ATRACT-4 (n = 3). Four adverse events were observed: one perforation (1.9 %), which was closed endoscopically, and three delayed bleeding events (5.5 %). The R0 rate was 93 %, resulting in curative resection in 91 % of cases. CONCLUSION: ESD using the ATRACT device is safe and effective in the colon and rectum, but can also be used to assist with procedures in the upper gastrointestinal tract. It may be particularly useful in difficult locations.

Endoscopic En Bloc Versus Piecemeal Resection of Large Nonpedunculated Colonic Adenomas : A Randomized Comparative Trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection of adenomas prevents colorectal cancer, but the optimal technique for larger lesions is controversial. Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has a low adverse event (AE) rate but a variable recurrence rate necessitating early follow-up. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can reduce recurrence but may increase AEs. OBJECTIVE: To compare ESD and EMR for large colonic adenomas. DESIGN: Participant-masked, parallel-group, superiority, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03962868). SETTING: Multicenter study involving 6 French referral centers from November 2019 to February 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with large (≥25 mm) benign colonic lesions referred for resection. INTERVENTION: The patients were randomly assigned by computer 1:1 (stratification by lesion location and center) to ESD or EMR. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was 6-month local recurrence (neoplastic tissue on endoscopic assessment and scar biopsy). The secondary end points were technical failure, en bloc R0 resection, and cumulative AEs. RESULTS: In total, 360 patients were randomly assigned to ESD (n = 178) or EMR (n = 182). In the primary analysis set (n = 318 lesions in 318 patients), recurrence occurred after 1 of 161 ESDs (0.6%) and 8 of 157 EMRs (5.1%) (relative risk, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96]). No recurrence occurred in R0-resected cases (90%) after ESD. The AEs occurred more often after ESD than EMR (35.6% vs. 24.5%, respectively; relative risk, 1.4 [CI, 1.0 to 2.0]). LIMITATION: Procedures were performed under general anesthesia during hospitalization in accordance with the French health system. CONCLUSION: Compared with EMR, ESD reduces the 6-month recurrence rate, obviating the need for systematic early follow-up colonoscopy at the cost of more AEs. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: French Ministry of Health.

Gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy versus botulinum toxin injection for the treatment of refractory gastroparesis: results of a double-blind randomized controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy (G-POEM) is a promising technique for treating refractory gastroparesis. We present the first double-blind randomized study comparing the clinical efficacy of G-POEM versus pyloric botulinum toxin injection (BTI). METHODS: This randomized study, conducted in two expert centers, enrolled patients with refractory gastroparesis, medically managed for >6 months and confirmed by gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES), into two groups, G-POEM versus BTI, with follow-up of 1 year. The primary end point was the 3-month clinical efficacy, defined as a >1-point decrease in the mean Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) score. Secondary end points were: 1-year efficacy, GES evolution, adverse events, and quality of life. RESULTS: 40 patients (22 women; mean age 48.1 [SD 17.4]), with mean symptom duration of 5.8 (SD 5.7) years, were randomized. Etiologies included idiopathic (n=18), diabetes (n=11), postoperative (n=6), and mixed (n=4). G-POEM showed a higher 3-month clinical success than BTI (65% vs. 40%, respectively; P=0.10), along with non-significantly higher 1-year clinical success (60% vs. 40%, respectively) on intention-to-treat analysis. The GCSI decreased in both groups at 3 months and 1 year. Only three minor adverse events occurred in the G-POEM group. The GES improvement rate was 72% in the G-POEM group versus 50% in the BTI group (non-significant). CONCLUSION: G-POEM seems to have a higher clinically relevant success rate than BTI, but this was not statistically demonstrated. This study confirms the interest in treatments targeting the pylorus, either mechanically or chemically, for managing refractory gastroparesis.

A 3D-printed pedal fixator for connecting different pedal-operated tools reduces the number of mistakes during endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Background and study aims What distinguishes endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) from endoscopic mucosal resection is the need for three foot pedals to activate the electrosurgical unit, flushing and knife injection. The lack of connection between the various pedals of different shapes and brands leads to numerous pedals displacements and potential mistakes. The aim of this study was to evaluate an Innovative PEdal FIXator (IPEFIX) to reduce pedal mistakes during ESD. Methods This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized study. Consecutive ESD procedures were randomly assigned to two groups: a control group with the three pedals free and the IPEFIX group in which the three pedals were linked by IPEFIX. The main outcome evaluated was the number of foot mistakes (wrong pedal, foot push beside the pedal). Results A total of 107 ESDs were performed by eight experts in five centers. The median number of mistakes per hour of ESD procedure was 0/h in the IPEFIX group and 1.9/h in the control group ( P <0.001). The mean number of times to look down to control the position of the pedals was 2.2/h the IPEFIX group and 7.7/h in the control group ( P <0.001). Mean replacements of the pedals were 0./h in the IPEFIX group and 1.7/h in the control group ( P <0.001). Similar results were obtained in trainees in simulated ESD on animal models. Conclusions IPEFIX is a simple device to connect different pedals during endoscopic procedures. It helps to reduce the numbers of foot mistakes during ESD and improves operator comfort.

Western outcomes of circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection (cESD) in the esophagus has been reported to be feasible in small Eastern case series. We assessed the outcomes of cESD in the treatment of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in Western countries. METHODS: We conducted an international study at 25 referral centers in Europe and Australia using prospective databases. We included all patients with ESCC treated with cESD before November 2022. Our main outcomes were curative resection according to European guidelines and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 171 cESDs were performed on 165 patients. En bloc and R0 resections rates were 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.0-99.4) and 69.6% (95% CI, 62.3-76.0), respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 49.1% (95% CI, 41.7-56.6) of the lesions. The most common reason for noncurative resection was deep submucosal invasion (21.6%). The risk of stricture requiring 6 or more dilations or additional techniques (incisional therapy/stent) was high (71%), despite the use of prophylactic measures in 93% of the procedures. The rates of intraprocedural perforation, delayed bleeding, and adverse cardiorespiratory events were 4.1%, 0.6%, and 4.7%, respectively. Two patients died (1.2%) of a cESD-related adverse event. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 2 years were 91% and 79%. CONCLUSIONS: In Western referral centers, cESD for ESCC is curative in approximately half of the lesions. It can be considered a feasible treatment in selected patients. Our results suggest the need to improve patient selection and to develop more effective therapies to prevent esophageal strictures.